Corruptions as they have many Errors in the Doctrine of Faith which yet does not in his judgment destroy the essential points of the Christian Doctrine 3 Many of them declare that they hold Communion with our Churches to be lawful And then 1. Who is the true Catholick Christian and who is the real Schismatick He that holds Communion with all Protestant Churches occasionally lawful and accordingly holds Communion with them actually as Providence gives him opportunity or he that denying all Churches to be truly such except his own refuses Communion with them for want of a Ceremony or two and the necessary consequence of a Ceremony A Bishop 2. That they hold Communion with this Church to be lawful is one of those dubious Propositions which will do the conceding Party no harm nor them that make use of it any service First many of them declare so and many declare otherwise but they do neither of them prejudge the other nor intend to bind them to their private sentiments and it 's as good an argument to prove Communion unlawful because many declare against it as 't is to prove it lawful because many declare for it Secondly they declare Communion lawful but do they declare total Communion lawful The same persons will tell us that both these Propositions are true Communion is lawful and Communion is unlawful Communion in some parts of worship is so in others not And thirdly they will further tell us that Communion with some Parish-Churches is lawful with others unlawful that there are not the same Doctrines preached the same Ceremonies urged the same rigid terms of Communion in all Churches exacted And lastly that occasional Communion is or may be lawful where a stated and fixed Communion is not so and they give this reason for their judgment and practice because to hold Communion with one Church or sort of Christians exclusively to all others is contrary to their true Catholick principles which teach them to hold Communion though not equally with all tolerable Churches and that there are some things tolerable which are not eligible wherein they can bear with much for peace-sake but chuse rather to sit down ordinarily with purer administrations It is a dangerous thing to give us uncertain ambulatory Notions of Schism other than what the Scripture has given us both because the Scriptures alone can inform us what is the Notion of a true Church and by consequence what must be the true Notion of sinful Separation from it and because these unstable mutable Notions of Schism will make that to be Schism in one Countrey which is an innocent thing in another and that to be Schism one year which perhaps the next may prove a good and Catholick practice That was Schism in England in Edward the 6th's days which was not so in Queen Maries and that was Schism in Her Reign which became none in the days of Her Successor And we may be Schismaticks here in England when if we cross the water we shall be none though we practise the same Worship and retain all that which at home would have fastened that brand upon us And if we travel through Germany though perhaps we cannot be Schismaticks and Catholicks twice a day because the miles are very long yet may we be both backwards and forwards forty times in a Twelvemonth and continue the same men both in principle and practice that we were when we went our pilgrimage It is little to our purpose what the Doctor is pleased to tell us what one told him viz. that An. Dom. 1663. Divers Preachers met at London to consider how far it was lawful or their duty to communicate with the parish-Parish-Churches where they lived in the Liturgy and Sacraments or that 20 Reasons were brought in to prove that it is a duty in some persons to join with some Parish-Churches three times a year in the Lord's Supper For 1. If they consider'd how far it was lawful I hope they spoke something at least to the Question and left it not as they found it a Question forsaken of its Answer which ought to be individual Companions 2. They met to consider what was lawful for or a duty to themselves not for or to others in whose names they had no commission to hear and determine the Question 3. If they inquired how far it was lawful or a duty they supposed that it was not unlimitedly so for to what end should they inquire how far they might go if they had once thought they could go through 4. And the design of the twenty reasons abundantly proves it for it was but some persons whose duty it was adjudged to be to receive the Sacrament thrice a year and it was but in some parishes neither where those some persons might communicate so that there might be some others many others possibly the greatest number whose duty it was not so to joyn and other some parishes many others and and possibly the greatest number with whom it was not lawful or not a duty to hold Communion The Case then is this a Christian may be placed in such circumstances that he may receive the Sacrament from some persons who will indulge him in the questionable Terms in such places where he cannot enjoy that ordinance at all if he do not receive it there and thus with many restrictions limitations distinctions and clauses a Case may be put wherein the twenty reasons may conclude some thing but yet nothing to the Doctors advantage But what effect what operation had these twenty reasons upon the Company Why none of them seemed to dissent that is they did not enter their several protestations nor formally declare against the Reasons of their Brother like wise and wary persons they would advise upon them They came to consider of the lawfulness of Communion and they would go away and consider of the strength of the Reasons propounded to convince them I see it 's more dangerous than I had thought it to have been to come into the parish Churches lest naked presence and silent appearing in those assemblies should be brought against us as an interpretative approbation of whatsoever is there done or spoken The Doctor adds that they had such another meeting after the plague and fire and if it were but such another there was no great harm in 't at which they agreed that communion with our Church was in it self lawful and good for which he quotes Plea for Peace p. 240. But here the Doctor is tardy by his favour and wrongs his Relator manifestly by nibbling off the last and most considerable words of the sentence viz. when it would do no more harm than good And we believe it lawful in that Case to hold Communion with any Church in the world so that now we must come to another enquiry and start a new question when there are one or two already up before the Dogs viz. whether Communion with the Parish-Churches will do more harm than good which it
of which my Inviter will not taste but the Doctor and the Reader will expect other Answers and that whatever becomes of others we do clear our selves 1. Then we will acknowledge that what we can lawfully do we ought to do for peace sake when peace will certainly be obtained from them by doing what we can lawfully do but if the doing all we lawfully can will not be accepted as the condition of peace to what end should we stretch our selves and straine our uttermost powers to reach that which can never be reacht I will part with much of my right deny my self in what I may lawfully do to buy my peace at the hands of a vexatious Neighbour but if all that I can lawfully do will not purchase it It s better saved than ill spent For an Indifferent thing that becomes good as it tends to a good end will yet be no good thing again but return into its old box of Indifferents when it tends not to that good end Nay that which is in its general nature a duty as relating to such an excellent end yet ceases to be a duty nay becomes a sin when it s applied to no such end An oath is a part of worship and so far a duty the end of an assertory Oath is to put an end to Controversies to procure peace among men but if an Oath of that sort be used where it cannot put an end to the controversy it becomes sinful as taking the name of God in vain 2. We acknowledge that what we lawfully can do for peace sake that we ought to do But withal we affirm that we actually do it and do it as our duty to for suppose I find it lawful in general to hear a sound pious Conformable Minister preach the Gospel when circumstances meet together to call me out to go I do it under the strict Notion of duty And they that find it lawful to Communicate in the prayers and Sacraments and the Church do judge they are doing a duty in such communion There must then be something else that the Doctor would have if we could get out the secret which his next Magisterial assertion perhaps may discover 3. They that judge it lawful nay their duty to hold Communion with the Church in prayer and Sacraments yet neither think it their duty nor lawful to joyne with one Church to deprive them of the lawfulness and duty of joyning with other Churches least whilst they press after positive duty they should neglect a Comparative duty for seeing they judge it a duty to joyne with the parochial Churches for peace sake and to joyne with others Churches also for the same end they shew a more true and Catholick Spirit for a general peace amongst all Christians then they whose Narrow straight laced Souls only designe a peace within the limits of their own Constitutions And 4. If it be true that what we may lawfully do without sin we ought to do as our duty why may not others turn the inference thus That seeing its lawful to joyn with the separate Churches without the guilt of schism it will be a duty also so to joyn for these that think the one lawful think the other lawful also and as the argument holds on one side it will hold on the other with equal force Nay 5. With more for those persons against whom this argument is brought from their own judgment of the lawfulness of joyning do judge it a more clear case that its lawful to joyn with those other meetings which are more near the word of God in worship and discipline and where the dubious Conditions of Communion are not found to raise scruples about the lawfulness of Communion with them which in other places cannot but sometimes occur Nor will those external accidental advantages which one side has got above the other vary the case seeing 't is the intrinsick merits of the cause that conscience regards in forming a right judgement about its duty And let thus much serve for an Answer 2. Yet I rather think there 's a further meaning in his words which we poor heedless sleepy Creatures little dream of I do not question but in time if they find it lawful they will judge it to be their duty In time yes all in good time that is when they have preacht up the Magistrate to a due height for persecution and alarm'd the Nation with another Presbyterian Plot or retrieved that of Ax-yard and the Meal-Tub when they have rallied up the whole Legion of Informers and once more given us a specimen of ecclesiastical Grace in driving us out of our houses into prisons then is the time when we shall all find it a duty to conform I have no great Reason to be confident of my self and I hope I know my own heart a little better than to trust it nor can I tell whether one terrour may not make me think that Lawful which I never so thought before and the next make me think it a duty a man is ready enough to stretch his Conscience rather than an halter there 's no such feeling conviction like that of the Statute nine and fifty dull arguments and one sharp sword will create a good title to the seventeen Provinces It may be then in time we shall find it a duty that is a duty not to God or our Consciences but to our Carcasses and other duty upon this account is not yet discovered 3 But the most probable intendment of this Paradox is That if we find such Communion lawful the intervening authority of the Magistrate will turn the scale and make it a duty To this I shall not need to say much because so far as we judge Communion lawful before the Command of the Magistrate so far we do judge it to be a duty under due circumstances and no further can we judge it to be either lawful or a duty when the Magistrates command has had its most operative influence either upon the things themselves or our Consciences yet these things we take to be clear 1. That where Communion with the Church would have been sinful under all its circumstances no command of the Magistrate can make it lawful 2. That no command of the Magistrate can discharge a Christian from that duty which he owes his proper Pastor or that particular Church whereof he is a member according to Gods Word 3. That the Magistrate has power from God to enforce all his Christian subjects to live peaceably among themselves and punish them that do otherwise but not to destroy that for which Peace is desirable namely the leading a quiet and secure life in all godliness and honesty for he is the Minister of God to us for our good and not for our ruine 13 Rom. 4. § 2. A second uncouth passage of the Doctors is that of page 56. It s hard to understand if occasional Communion be lawful that constant Communion should not be a duty I perceive
not our bare opinion as the Doctor wisely phraseth it but our setled judgment which we have do and shall maintain against them when they have once leisure to understand the Question We have therefore something to divide upon besides substantial parts of worship and circumstances And now where is this consequence which to an intelligent and observing Reader is the only strength of his Sermon But we need never fear it the Clergy will be sure to find us matter for quarrel and contention or it shall go hard besides a parcel of inconsiderable circumstances which may be determined but very sorrily by those that pretend most to the power for he that worst may commonly holds the Candle But 2. for further answer let him go back to the former Discourse where I have proved that the foundation upon which his discourse is built is weak and therefore the whole superstructure must tumble upon his own head for he supposes there is an agreement in Doctrine and the substantial parts of worship which we either deny or cannot grant till we are taught what he means by them The Controversie therefore stands upon the same bottom on which it has stood these hundred years and more like that famous stone in the West which they say a child may shake but a hundred men cannot overturn Every wrangler can jostle our principles but the United force of the world cannot overthrow them True men may be killed but Truth will out-live all enmity This argument of the Doctors has been frequently answered and exposed but now like an old Livery new turn'd and fresh trim'd up with a new Lace it passes for a spruce piece of Gallantry a brisk sally of Ratiocination so considerable it is who it is that speaks and writes more than what is spoken or written So have I known a sorry Jade which in the hands of the poor Countrey-man would not give five Marks when in the hands of a Gentleman a little curried up well managed by a nimble Jockey and stoutly voucht for by one that was no slave to his word fetch roundly Twenty Guineys at the hands of a youngster that had more money than wit What has hitherto engrost the whole strength of the Doctors Reason he now comes to set a fine edg and gloss upon with his Rhetorick To separate says he considering the variety of mens fancies about these matters is to make an infinite Divisibility in Churches without any possible stop to further Separation Which is nothing but the Eccho of that Charge which from their Roman Adversaries has so long and loudly rung about their own Ears I shall only say That the power which he ascribes to National Churches considering the great variety of the fancies and humours in finding out and imposing their own Inventions will but make burdens innumerable and intolerable without any possible stop to further and greater vexations only let him not always miscall Conscience by the scandalous name of Fancy The very truth is we have no Mathematical Certainty in these matters no such Demonstration Cui non potest subesse falsum which Archbishop Laud and by consequence the Doctor requires of all Dissenters when yet he could find no such Demonstration for the being of a God as I shall evince ere long But some will scruple where they need not and others to cry quit with them will impose where they ought not and thus between weakness and wilfulness between little knowledg and great pride humble peaceable Christians are like to have a fine time on 't But from some inconsiderable and petty inconveniences some little trouble that arises to a Church from the levity and volubility of mens minds to bring in that enormous monstrous principle of enslaving all mens judgments and consciences forcing them to surrender their Reasons to naked will and pleasure and put all that 's worth owning in their Beings into the hands of those of whose fidelity and tenderness to keep and dispose of them they have had no better experience and can have no good security is a Medicine worse than that Poyson even as much as 't is better to have a Rational Soul though subject to mistakes than the Soul of a Brute which may be managed as you will with a strong Bit and Bridle Honoured Sir you see how I have wearied my self to tire you with the prolixty of this Letter and now to refresh you in the close I 'le tell you a piece of News The Doctor tells us That if once the people be brought to understand and practise their duty as to Communion with our Churches other difficulties which obstruct our Vnion will be more easily removed It 's incredible what the various Votes of the Coffee-houses are about those words some say Ay! If there were no Nonconformists there would be no Nonconformity if there were no disagreement we should all be agreed others again deny it and say That though the people were brought to understand and practise all their duty which they owe to God and man yet the same difference the same distance would continue except it be first proved which they are always coming towards but can never find a time to come to that it is their duty to hold entire Communion with the parish-Parish-Churches others again of the more warm tempers assert That if the people could be brought to understand and practise their duty in these matters those Assemblies would be thinner than they are and some protest it 's a most Meridian Truth that if men could be brought to conform in practise but there lies the cunning on 't though against the shins and conscience all other difficulties would be easily removed for they that are once engaged in a practise whether by slavish fears or worldly hopes it makes no matter must study Arguments to defend their practise as well as they can and they vouch infallible experience to justifie their opinion for say they throw a Dog into a River over head and ears and if he will not take care to swim out let him be drown'd It 's mighty pleasing to me to hear the Doctor profess he has endeavoured to pursue his design without sharp and provoking reflexions on the persons of any for though you Sir have noted several passages as inconsistent with the sincerity of this expression yet I doubt not to clear up his Integrity You mention Page 38. where I confess the Doctor does say The most godly among them Dissenters can least endure to be told of their faults This did a little startle me but not stumble me into a disbelief of his Honesty for though he tells us he has not used provoking reflexions on the persons of any i. e. by name yet he might with a good conscience and without contradicton to his word make sharp provoking reflexions upon the whole generation of the Dissenters and condemn them in the lump And whereas you insist upon 't that the expression is either a scurrilous Sarcasm unbecoming a
been assignned to them nor do they love to have him for their Pastor whom they know to be of a different Religion from theirs But here are some particulars wherein the Reader will desire the Doctor 's ingenuity and that plainness which became a sermon 1. He asserts that there has been a great deal of art used to confound these two this I say is not honest dealing for they that Judge parochial Lay-communion lawful and have the greatest latitude that way have from Press and Pulpit sufficiently proclaimed their minds and they that judge otherwise have by their own practice and example sufficiently declared their judgment unless the Doctor be angry that they do not fill up their publick worship with declamations against Ceremonies and they that have made the nearest approaches to Parochial Communion have found such bad treatment that they are tempted to judge the Clergy are more afraid of their coming wholly in than keeping out of the Church and they are to be allowed the fittest judges in this case because they know best what stock the Church-commons will bear In the mean time they may take warning how they approach too near that flame which has already singed some or their wings and may possibly consume their whole bodies but consciencious men are above those considerations 2. The Doctor tells us that in the Judgment of the most impartial among the dissenters little is to be said on the behalf of the people from whom none of those things are required None of these things what not to dedicate their Children to God by the sign of the cross not to kneel at the Sacrament I am sure the Canons of 1603. have declared Can. 30. that in memory of the Cross and other Reasons the Church of England hath thought meet to retain the sign of the Cross in baptism taking it for a symbol whereby the Infant is devoted or dedicated to the service of him who dyed the death of the Cross This is the true import of that Canon which I cannot now give the Reader the English of Verbatim having only by me a Latine Copy of those Canons And those of the most impartial among the dissenters and such as have come nearest to conformity in their Lay-Capacity will tell you that there are some things which even they in their private station cannot comply withall 3. The Doctor does not understand how they can preach lawfully to a people who commit a sin in hearing them Either then the things are unintelligible or the Dr. is not that man of understanding we have always taken him for what the Divisions of Reuben were he does not well understand p. 2. Why many Cities united under one civil government and the same Rules of Religion should not be called one national Church he cannot understand p. 19. And if occasional Communion be lawful that constant Communion should not be a duty is hard to understand p. 56. And now here how they can preach lawfully to a people who commit a fault in hearing them he does not understand But what great difficulty lies in this Some do sin though they hear and yet not sin because they hear or there may be a sin in the hearer and yet no sin in hearing but whatever the tempers or distempers the ends and designs of the hearers are that which justifies the Ministers preaching is his own call to the Ministry not the qualification of the hearers A man may come from the next parish to hear the Doctor when by the Rules of the Church he should have been in his own parish Church and yet the Doctor will not think that this supersedes the exercise of his Ministry Some may come out of custom because they have used to trundle thither down the hill others out of curiosity to hear a person of whom fame has spoken so much others out of a carping humour to pick quarrels as no doubt Priests and Jesuites have done and yet the Doctor satisfies himself that it is his duty to do his Masters work and however they hear sinfully schismatically captiously yet he is acquitted in his ministerial service 3 The Doctor tells us he does not confound bare suspending Communion in some particular Rites with either total or at least ordinary forbearance of Communion in what they judge lawful and proceeding to the forming of separate Congregations What great matter is it to us or to the controversie what the Doctor shall please to confound or to distinguish The law of the nation which is the assigned Rule and Reason of Conformity requires total Conformity to all Rites The Law considers not whether mens scruples be modest or immodest nor what they judge lawful or unlawful Conformity is exacted to the whole Liturgy Ceremonies and the Laity must not pick and chuse what they can use and refuse the rest they must like Travellours on the King 's high way keep to the road and not break out here and there to escape the foul way If the Doctor were the Church of England or the Parliament it were considerable but as the case stands we are under a peremptory law Now then if there be some things which we do scruple and not only scruple but upon the most impartial scrutiny we can make do judge sinful and these be made the condition of enjoying one Sacrament or other Ordinance of Christ and that by a law of his as peremptory as any of these of men and imposed upon a far more severe penalty than man can inflict we are bound to live in the constant use of all his institutions we must unite our selves to those churches where we may enjoy them upon better terms Thus much in consideration of his considerations But yet we are to seek for the answer to the Question How far we are obliged to comply with an establisht Rule Separation of whole Churches is shut out of the Question Ministerial Conformity is shut out of the Question Suspending Communion in some particular Rites is shut out of the Question But where is the answer to the Question That is adjourned or prorogued or utterly lost and therefore if any honest Gentleman or Citizen has taken up the answer to this question lost between St. Pauls and the Guild-Hall Chappel let him restore it to the owner and he will be well rewarded for his pains And now let the Reader judge whether the dissenters are not likely to be well instructed by a Catechism made up of Questions without Answers SECT V. The state of the present Controversie between the disagreeing Parties as laid down by the Doctor what Concessions some Dissenters make and what use the Doctor makes of them THE former Question being laid by at present he comes to consider the present Case of Separation and to make the sinfulness and mischief of it appear And this is it which denominates the Discourse The Mischief of Separation Though to an impartial Considerer how loth they are to step over a straw or to forgo the
will certainly do 1. When such Communion shall persuade the Parish-Churches that their Frame is eligible and not only tolerable that they are righteous and need no repentance pure as well as true Churches of Christ and need no Reformation 2. When that Communion shall be so managed that the persons communicating must be obliged to separate from all other Churches which they judge to be of a purer mold and wherein they may enjoy all Christ's Ordinances with much greater and clearer satisfaction to their Consciences and more notable advantages for edification 3. When such Communion shall visibly harden the Papists in their superstitious usages As kneeling at the Sacrament bowing before Altars Churches the East and at the word Jesus has apparently done and so much T.G. the Doctor 's grand Antagonist has professed in his Dispute about Idolatry 4. When such Communion and Conformity shall notably prejudice the Christian Religion in general and that this would have been the effect of an universal Conformity was well express'd by a Conformable Minister of good Note in the Church who told his Friend a Captain in His Majesties Service That he was heartily glad that so many Ministers had refus'd to Conform upon the Terms proposed And being ask'd with some wonderment a reason of his strange expression he answer'd thus Not that thereby they had more good Livings to scramble for as one answer'd Had all Conform'd the People would have thought there had been nothing in Religion that it had been onely a thing to talk of in the Pulpit to serve a State design but now by throwing up their Livings and exposing themselves and Families to outward ruine rather than Conform to the things imposed not agreeable as they apprehend to the Gospel they had preached they have convinced the world there is a Reality in Religion and thereby given a check to Atheism To shut up this Discourse If the Doctor would have us Conform as far as we judge it lawful when such Compliance is cloathed with all its particular circumstances we are willing to it provided the Doctor can secure us that such Compliance shall be accepted in full satisfaction of the debt But we doubt it must not be the Dean of St. Paul's but the Convocation there that must assign the Limits Bounds Terms and Measures of our Conformity If hearing a Sermon as we have occasion and going as much further as Conscience warranted by the Word will permit us would excuse us from being reviled and railed at as Schismaticks Rebels Traytors and what not would do it it would be done nay it is done but if he has no Commission to treat with us and compound the matter I fear he has spoiled the Wit and Ingenuity of his late Allegory and fought a Skirmish without the Command of his General for though he stand upon very high Ground he stands not as yet on the highest and there are higher than he SECT VI. The Grounds of the present Separation assigned by the Doctor Examined and Cleared THE main Question so solemnly propounded by the Reverend Doctor having given us the slip we are entertained with another What are the Grounds of the present Separation and the utmost he can find in the best Writers of the several Parties amounts but to these two 1. That although they are in a State of Separation from the Church yet this Separation is not Schism And he courteously supposes them to have one Reason for this Principle from the Author of Evangelical Love p. 68. Our Lord Christ Instituted only Congregational Churches or particular Aslemblies for Divine Worship which having the sole Church-power in themselves they are under no Obligation of Communion with other Churches but only to preserve Peace and Charity with them and from the Author of The true and only way of Concord p. 111. That to devise new Species of Churches beyond Parochial or Congregational without God's Authority and to impose them on the World yea in his Name and call all Dissenters Schismaticks is a far worse usurpation than to make and Impose new Ceremonies This is all the reason the Doctor can find to justifie their Separation to be no Sin But does the vast weight of their Cause hang upon one single string I can shew him where he may find more assigned by the Author of Evangelical Love whom he quotes 1. That there are many things in all Parochial Churches that openly stand in need of Reformation which these Parochial Churches neither do nor can nor have power to Reform And who would joyn with them that have no power to Reform themselves 2. Many things in the constant total Communion of Parochial Churches are imposed on the Consciences and Practices of men which are not aceording to the mind of Christ And will Christ Condemn them for Schismaticks who are ready to come up to his Commands because they dare advance no further 3. That there is no Evangelical Church-Discipline administred in such Parochial Churches which yet is a necessary means unto the Edification of the Churches appointed by Christ himself And are they Schismaticks who separate not from but to any of Christ's means for their Edification 4. The Rule and Government which such Parochial Churches are under in the room of that which ought to be in and among themselves viz. by Bishops-Courts Chancellors Commissaries is unknown to the Scriptures And are they Schismaticks who refuse an unscriptural for a Scriptural Rule and Government 5. There is a total Deprivation of the Peoples Liberty to chuse their own Pastors whereby they are deprived of all use of their Light and Knowledge for providing for their own Edification And it 's hard that men shall be made Schismaticks because they would use their Reasons that is unless they will be something worse than Men they cannot be good Christians 6. That there is a want of due means of Edification in many of those Parochial Congregations and yet none shall be allowed to provide themselves better And is it not very severe for Christians to be Damned because they would be more certainly and easily Saved Thus then we see there are other many other Reasons alledged to justifie such Separation to be no Schism though it pleased the Doctor to wink at them and Assign only this one which yet it 's well if he can Confute In order to which He thinks That to clear the practice of Separation from being a Sin two things are necessary to be done § 1. To prove that a Christian has no obligation to external Communion beyond a Congregational Church And is this the Duty incumbent upon them They think they have done enough if they prove there 's an Obligation lies upon them to hold external Communion in that Church whereof they are Members and let others prove that they are obliged to Communion beyond those Bounds If the Dissenters enlarge their Communion as far as Christ enlarged the Churches let them who have enlarged the Bounds of the Churches prove
Ministers be true Ministers of Christ for if there be no certainty of the Divine Right of particular Congregations there can be as little of certainty That there is any Divine Authority given to the Teachers of them And 5. It will be uncertain whether God will be solemnly and publickly Worshipped for where can he so be but in particular Assemblies And thus to make a National Church certain he has reduced all things to an utter uncertainty § 5. He argues further to this purpose It 's certainly our Duty to preserve Peace and Unity among Christians and it 's impossible so to do if Men break all orders in Pieces for the fancy they have taken up of a Primitive Platform It 's well there is something Certain though it 's hard to conceive how we should preserve Peace if it be uncertain in what we 〈◊〉 to unite and agree It 's the Unity of the Spirit that will be kept in the Bond of Peace Peace is the Bond of the Churches but there must be first conceived a Church which Peace is to bind There must be a Vineyard or to what purpose a Hedge a City or to what purpose a Wall or Bulwark More particularly 1. As it is the Duty of all Men to preserve the Churches Peace so 't is theirs especially who have got the Management of things in their hands not to lay such dubious Terms in the way of Peace which they know many Consciencious persons cannot get over but have ever stumbled at for it may be returned with ease It is impossible to preserve Peace if wen will make such Orders as they know others must break meerly for the fancy they have taken up of a Primitive Platform 2. If Peace be impossible to be had upon this account who are in the fault Dissenters can maintain a fraternal Charity towards them and their Churches who differ from them in Principle and Practice if imposers cannot or will not discharge that Duty reciprocally we are not responsible for their Passions we can love them whether they will or no though we cannot force them against their will to return that Love and Charity 3. But must Peace be extended no farther than local and actual Communion or must the Parishes of St. Andrews Sepulchers and St. Giles go together by the ears because one Church will not hold the hundredth part of them I can hold and maintain Peace with the Greek Church and yet I never intend actual Communion with it unless she were much more Reformed from all her Corruptions than she is like to be in haste There may be such Corruptions in a Church as may defile it and yet not un-Church it I can distinguish between the Christians and their Christianity on one hand and the Pollutions wherewith they have abased their Christianity on the other § 6 But to this the Doctor Answers Men may please themselves in talking of preserving Peace and Love under separate Communions but our own sad experience shews the contrary This is the upshot of his Reasonings There can be no Peace under separate Communions which I shall answer by asking a few sober questions which will lead to their respective Answers 1. Whether by separate Communion he intends only such as is Locally separate if so joyful Experience shews us the contrary we have no Bellum Parochiale nor are like to have could they secure us as well against a Bellum Episcopale 2. Does he by Separated Communion intend such as differ only in some external Modes How then do the Countrey Villages agree so well with the Cathedral Mother-Churches It 's certain that the Cathedral Service and that of the under Parishes differ so much that a poor Countrey-man dropping in by chance into the Worship would be half affrighted out of his Wits such a Ditty such a Din with Organs Choristers Singing-men and Boys that from the uncertain Sound and confused noise the poor Fellow would not know what was Piped or Tooted so a grave Alderman in the days of Yore going out with the Common-hunt and being askt if he did not feel a transport and extasie of soul at the ravishing musick of the hounds protested he could not hear any musick at all for the barking of those yelping Curs but come into the Country we have nothing there but bad Rhimes set to as bad tunes and worse sung In the one you have turning hither faceing thither such ducking dopping bending bowing cringing changing of postures that the poor country man begins to question whether it be the same God that they and he worship and if it be he 's amazed that God should regard their rude homespun devotions when he has such glorious service such splendid pompous worship in other places and yet we do not see that they come to knocking If then these two sorts can live peaceably and lovingly together the one not despising the rusticity of the high-shoe devotions the other not judging of envying at or grudging against their more stately shows and pageants why will they quarrel with the plain dissenters whose only fault is that though their worship is not well trimmed up with ceremonious ribons 't is of as strong stuff will last as long and keep the wearer as warm as the other 3. Whereas the Doctor fancies that this will alienate mens affections The remedy is to preach down passion pride censoriousness and those base lusts which would produce the same effects if all men were of one Communion If one will be angry because another mans Nose is longer than his own he must restrain his anger for the other cannot help the longitude of his Nose nor give it one degree less of elevation Let them punish or otherwise restrain those incendiaries who by their hot and fiery tempers will suffer none to be cool that are in themselves of a more winterly temper Let them curb such preachers as the Author of Curse ye Meroz who did enough to have kindled a greater fire at Guild-Hall than that which begun at Pudding-Lane The disease lies in mens minds and when they would heal the outward Symptom 't is but like him that applied the plaister to the wrong finger and then complained of his plaister Let men be preacht into the spirit of mutual forbearance and there will be peace under various practices These continual beatings of the Doctor and some others upon Peace mind me of what I have somewhere or other seen or read of a great Gentleman who courted a Lady of no less virtue than Beauty and such an Inamorato was he grown that he became exceedingly melancholly his folded armes his hat plukt in 's eyes retiredness from all company witnessed great distress at last he came to a resolution that seeing he could not win her affections he would die a Sacrifice in the flame of his own This noble Lady whose Name I now remember was Madam Peace not willing that any Gentleman should die a Martyr for her sake began to relent only she desired
there are other just rules of conscience then Gods Law which is a Notion we cannot admit of without better evidence we would gladly know where those other just Rules are to be found must we seek them in Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical whether then are all such or only some of them such just rules If onely some of them which are they and by what characteristical marks may we distinguish them but if all be so then must we acquiesce in all the Canons decrees rescripts and Rules that were ever made by any Counsel or convocation and why then did not the Church of England rest satisfied with those rules which were given her before the Reformation 2. We must needs say that if the Dissenters do examine things fairly on both sides praying for Divine Direction and have had a world of patience to boot to hear any thing against their Opinion though never so weak in Reason and strong in passion which they profess before the searcher of all hearts they have done and continue still to do they must be discharg'd before all the world that shall take cognizance of their cause and hear their pleas of any wilful or voluntary error And for the suggestion that they form their judgments from prejudice passion and interest they dare not judge of other men contenting themselves to have averred their own innocency when the temptation visibly lies on the other side § 4. For a Conclusion The Dr. would apply the charge of a wilfully erroneous Conscience to the Dissenters If men says he through the power of an erroneous Conscience may think themselves bound to make schisms to disobey Laws to break in pieces the Communion of the Church they may satisfie themselves that they pursue their Consciences and yet for want of due care of inforcing themselves those actions may be wilful and damnable sins But we think not our selves bound to any such wickedness There are enow that think themselves bound t do that without our assistance enow besides us to perpetuate the cause of our divisions and to entail contentions upon Innocent posterity whose teeth must be set on Edge with the sowre grapes their Fathers have eaten but if any shall think themselves bound through the power of an Erroneous Conscience to make unjust Rules of Conscience when t is Impossible they should make one de novo that is just and thereby break the Church in peices they may think what they please that they are pursueing their just rights to impose upon other mens Consciences and satisfying their own and yet for want of a due care to inform themselves better in their duty the extent of their power and the ends for which it was given be guilty in the sight of God of willful and damnable sins as bad as those of the Jews who thought they did God good Service when they persecuted and murtherd his faithful Servants SECTION IX A consideration of those Assertions of the Doctor If Communion with the Church be lawful it will in time be judged a duty And If occasional Communion be lawful its hard to understand that constant Communion should not be a duty I Find the Doctor ever and anon insinuating that what is lawful to be done upon some account or other ought to be done Which if it be universally true will take away the difference between merely lawful and necessary at least as to use and practice since it implies that whatever is lawful may be made constantly and fixedly a duty If it were only asserted that what is merely lawful might through a concurrence of circumstances pro hic nunc become a duty as it would do this cause no service so neither would it meet with our opposition But to be thus laid down in general without further explication needs a little consideration and so in this case that which otherwise had been but lawful will be incumbent on me as my duty Two expressions I find worthy our Notice 1. I do not question but in time if they find it Communion in prayers and Sacraments lawful they will judge it to be their duty Now because we have ever thought that what was lawful and merely so stood in the midst between sinful and necessary forbidden and Commanded it deserves some care and pains to dive into the Mystery of it how or why these lawfulls may become determined to one side of their extremes or termes between which they formerly stood neuters And by what we can gather from his discourse it must be one of these things 1. That whatever we judge lawful to be done in any case for peace sake will become a duty to be alwayes done For he tells us p. 31. 32. There 's nothing Christ and his Apostles have charged more upon the Consciences of Christians then studying to preserve peace and unity among Christians To which pupose the Doctor quotes us several places of Scripture which it is needless here to repeat seeing none ever yet denied the study of peace to be a very great and manifest duty But if it be charg'd on the Consciences of all Christians to study to preserve peace We hope they find the charge upon their Consciences also for they are Christians Have they then studyed the things that make for peace I mean not their own but the peace of all the Christians in the Nation A little study would have discovered the means had they been as they pretend such passionate Lovers of the end What expedients have they then found out by all their study or what expedients will they accept that others have studied and found out to releive and procure peace so far as it s lost to preserve peace so far as it yet remaines and to further peace so far as it may be attainable in the Imperfect state of this life what will they part with to purchase it will they step over one straw remove one stumbling block that lies in the way of it will they wave the least of their pretensions or condescend to others in the smallest of their desires will they promise to reforme our Rubrick that one Rule for finding out Easter for ever when it would not find it out for but proved it self Erroneous in almost half seven years will they forbear to exact our Assent and consent to a known falshood for that excellent thing which they so much predicate Peace The matter is slight yet if an Error they can more easily forgoe it then we avow it we know not why we should tell the smallest lie for peace if they will not part with one Nay tell us what thing so Inconsiderate so minute which all our humble Petitions for peace could procure the relaxation of And yet thâ—se are the Men that boast themselves highly of their burning zeal for peace To be an Advocate for peace is an office of good credit but I cannot tell what to think on 't when I am pressed so earnestly and heartily to feed lustily on that Dâ—sh
he is somewhat hard of understanding especially of those things that he has no mind to In the former discourse he argues from the lawfulness of Communion to the necessity but here also from occasional to constant Communion To which confident assertion of his we Oppose this Occasional communion with a particular Church may be lawful when yet constant fixed stated Communion may not be a duty which we prove 1. From their own Doctrines and practises Their Canons have made it the duty of every individual member of their Church to hold constant Communion with his own parish Church and Teacher and yet they allow occasional Communion with other parish Churches A journey will make occasional Communion with a remote Congregation lawful but they will hardly perswade us that they can make it our duty to take such journeys in order to such communion If the great Bell rings at the next parish to a Lecture Sermon or chimes all in to Divine Service when we have none of those at home 't is lawful to take the occasion without coming under a constant obligation to it The dissenters crave the same equity they say they are under an obligation ordinarily fixedly statedly constantly to worship God in those congregations whereof they are members they say they can readily joyn with other congregations as they have opportunity but they cannot admit the inference that because they may occasionally that therefore they must constantly practise it because Acts of worship have a larger extent then Church relation those may be performed and yet these remain sacred and inviolate 2. Some conforming Ministers and Christians judge it lawful to hold communion occasionally with the dissenters in prayer and preaching what a rare argument has the Dr. furnisht us with to prove it their constant duty and from once hearing lawfully to prove it an incumbent duty to hear them for ever 3. It may be lawful occasionally to step in and hear a very weak preacher perhaps one that is vicious in his life or unfound in some points of Doctrine when we can hear no other will it follow that we are bound or that any power on earth can bind us to hear such constantly when God has made better provision for our souls and we want only grace to accept it 4. How many have judg'd it lawful to go to a play or the Chappel at Sommersethouse occasionally who yet think that twenty Acts of Parliament cannot make either of them a constant duty 5. And how unwilling are most men to be argued into duty from the meer lawfulness of the thing The Dr. thinks it lawful to resign one of his preferments to some worthy person that has none and yet his own argument will hardly convince him 't is his duty It seems very lawful for him that is almost melted with two coats to part with one to his brother that 's almost naked and yet we despair of success in thus arguing with him Nay it were well if some men would be perswaded that plain duty when it crosses worldly interest is duty and we should the better bear with them in denying every thing lawful to be duty And 6. If all lawful things may be converted into duty and what is occasionally indifferent may be turn'd into constant necessity then farewel Christian liberty and let man hereafter eternally mourn or dance to the Musick of his fetters SECTION X. Of terms of Communion required by the Church whether upon the same Reason that some of them are Imposed the Church may not also impose some Vse of Images Circumcision and the Paschal Lamb WE hear every day eloquent Orations in praise of peace and Union smart declamations against separation but we seldom hear of the fatal terms which obstruct the one or may justifie the other I shall not tire the Reader with a tedious enumeration of the particular conditions but shall content my self to have named One though I discontent some others that I have no more and some will find themselvs aggrieved that I have named that one It is the use of the sign of the Cross in baptism which I intend and have therefore singled out that one because it is number'd amongst the three innocent Ceremonies and because 't is imposed both on the Ministers to practice it and the people to dedicate their Children to God by it 1 And here I ask what Reason can be assigned for the use of this sign as it signifies Christs cross and him crucified thereon as it is the symbol of a persons dedication to Christ and his service but what will equally justifie the Religious use of a crucifix set up in the Church for the same use and purposes This sign of the cross is instituted by the Church First as a memorial of Christs cross Secondly as a Symbol whereby a person is dedicated to him who died the death of the cross Thirdly as a token that he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight under his banner against sin the world and the Devil to continue Christs faithful servant and soldier to his lives end That these are the ends and uses of that sign is expresly owned by the Canons of 1603. and the office of baptism in the Liturgy Now why the image of Christ upon the Cross or a Crucifix may not be used for these ends upon the same Reason nay upon somewhat better reason we are yet to seek for if a sign may be used to these ends to make impression upon our minds of those spiritual truths duties and mercies the fixed visible Image will much better do the work then the transient and scarce visible sign of a cross made in the Air with the finger That the Papists do use the Image of Christ upon the Cross as an immediate though not ultimate object of Adoration is true and it is as true that the Church of England does not use the sign of the Cross nor is it by us charg'd to use it for that end but yet as there is an inferiour use of the Crucifix to be the Lay-mans hornbook to teach him to spell out a crucified Christ and a Covenanting use to initiate Converts in the profesion of the Gospel and an obliging use to engage them to serve their Redeemer so there can be no solid reason given why such lower uses of an Image or Crucifix may not be introduced but what will equally militate against our use of the Cross 2. What Reason can be alledged why circumcision may not be imposed as a tearm of Union or Communion to signify the circumcision of the heart as well as the sign of the Cross to signifie faithfulness and perseverance in the service of Christ To the Jews indeed it was a badge of their duty to keep the whole law Gal. 3.4 And such use would now be apparently sinful but suppose it were enjoyned for no other end than as the surplice to denote purity kneeling at the Sacrament to
out with the Dissenters Congregations what is all this to the overthrow of the Church This priviledg may be abused must it therefore not be used Vnsetled heads and unstable hearts will be wandring let them go 't is a good riddance of them if they be obstinate but where this humour has destroy'd one Church this rigorous forcing of Pastors upon the people has divided and destroyed hundreds The generality of Dissenters in this Nation at this day may be reduced to two Heads First Such who having been formerly sixt with and under their faithful Pastors by their deliberate choice after good experience of their Ministerial abilities to teach them the mind and will of God of their wisdom to advise them in their spiritual cases of their skill to conduct them through their emergent difficulties of their meekness sobriety heavenly-mindedness and whatever might recommend to and inforce upon their consciences their sound Doctrine do still judg it their unquestionable duty to abide in that Relation and by no terrours to be driven by no blandishments to be withdrawn from their oversight and guidance according to the word of God judging that such withdrawing such separation would be that real Schism which hears so badly in and is loaded with such guilt by the holy Scriptures A second sort is of those who having been sometime hearers at large in their respective Parish-Churches and coming at last to have more concernment for their souls and the important business of another world and finding that their Parochial Teacher was either so overlaid with a numerous throng of people which he commonly but unadvisely calls his Flock and Charge that he cannot personally take care of the hundredth part of them or so engaged in secular affairs of more weight to him than his Pastoral Charge that he has neither heart nor leisure to attend so troublesome an employment or so unskilful in the word of Righteousness that he cannot tolerably declare the Counsel of God for edification or so unsound in his judgment that he 's more likely to poyson than feed his people or so debauched in his life that he plucks down more in an hour than he builds up in a year or such a Bigot for humane Inventions and Superstitions that the naked simplicity of divine Worship is either clouded to render it useless or clogged to render it burdensome this person seeks and finds out some other Pastor qualified as before described to whose Ministerial conduct under Christ the only chief shepherd he commits himself and there peaceably and patiently continues notwithstanding the barbarick clamours of Schism and Separation And all this without more prejudice to the Church he forsakes then it 's an injury to a Tradesman to leave his shop who has left it himself or has his hands full of better customers 2. That it is the duty of every Christian to worship God not only in purity of the heart but according to the purity of Gospel-administrations The true measure of which Purity is to be taken from its consonancy and harmony with the word of God which has sufficiently either in general special or particular instructed us in the acceptable service of our God Purity of worship is no such idle and contemptible thing to be flam'd off with an impertinent story that we must not separate from a true Church upon pretence of greater purity Nor can I imagine upon what pretence except that of greater purity the Church of England separated from Rome if it be true what we read in Rat. Account p. 293. That the Church of Rome is a true Church and what he further owns Defence against T. G. p. 785. I allow says the Doctor the Church of Rome to be a true Church as holding all the essential points of the Christian faith and what the Archbishop Laud confessed to that Lady who would needs go before to Rome alone because she could not bear a crowd that she might be saved in Communion with the Roman Church Now if Rome be a true Church if she holds all the essential points of Christianity If salvation may be attained in that Communion why was there such a stir about reforming of Accidents when the Essentials were secured Why such a Contest about a little easier way when the other way was passable Why all this a-do about a purer Church when the other is confessed a true Church These things then will follow in the lump from the Archbishops and Doctors Concessions 1. That a person or party may separate from some true Church which holds all the essential points of the Christian faith without the Imputation of a Schismatick 2. That a person or party may separate from some Church where salvation is attainable without peril of the guilt of Schism 3. That the only Reason that yet appears to justifie the Church of Englands departure from Rome is that it is lawful in some cases to withdraw from the Communion of a true Church wherein all the essential points of faith are owned and wherein salvation may be attained for the sake of greater purity of worship greater clearness of Doctrine and greater security of salvation Is it then lawful for England to separate from Italy for greater purity It may be lawful for others to separate from England for greater purity 'T is readily acknowledged that the Impurity of the Roman Synagogue is much more unconceivably more than that of the Church of England and therefore there was not so great cause to leave the latter as the former upon that account but in aspiring after Conformity to the Institutions of Christ we are not to consider so much what is behind as what is before not so much what we have left as what we have yet to reach nor so much the Terminus aquo from what state of Impurity we have emerged as the Terminus ad quem to what state of purity we would arrive for if it be true that there is such a state of Purity to be obtained and such a state of Impurity to be avoided as will justifie our forsaking of this for that and such a measure of both these as will not It must be exactly stated what is the lowest degree of corruption that will and what is the highest that will not warrant a separation The Dissenters being judges there are enow at home to excuse their secession The Romanists being judges there are not enow abroad to vindicate the Church of Englands separation and the former are more confirm'd in their judgment since the Doctors Epistle Dedicatory to the now B. of London prefixt to his Defence against T. G. where he openly avows on the behalf of the English Church that it has reformed those abuses only which have crept in since the times of the first four general Councils Now the last of these four first being held at Chalcedon An. 451. there were such Corruptions crept into the Church before that time which if imposed upon any as the condition of enjoying
be pressing forward to whatsoever degree of exactness in this life is attainable We question whether we ought not to aspire and endeavour after greater purity but it 's past all question with us that we ought not to retreat to greater Impurity Dissenters are so far from divding that they would be growing up into greater Union they would walk as they have attained to know and would know more that they may walk farther know clearer that they may walk holier and for what they cannot attain by study prayer and the due use of all good means they would humbly wait upon God till he shall and that he may reveal even that thing also unto them But some are so hasty and impatient that they will neither stay Gods leisure nor theirs but drive knowledg into their heads and their brains out of their heads with the great Churchbeetle 6. Lastly I have heard some of them own this principle That where the Church has no power to command there it cannot be the peoples duty to obey for power to command and obligation to obedience being Relatives must be affirmed or denied equally and reciprocally if then the Church has no power from Christ and whence she should derive it but from him I cannot divine to impose these things in Controversie it can never be proved their duty to obey in the premises 'T is a sad sight to see how Dissenters have been teazed with that Text Let all things be done decently and in order but the clamour grows very weak from that Quarter and now a new Text has been found out which they hope will kill and slay all before it As we have already attained let 's walk by the same rule from whence they argue with singular acuteness we must walk as we have attained and therefore we must walk as we have not attained if we be otherwise minded we must wait till God reveal it to us therefore though we be otherwise minded we must act as if like-minded and though there be various degrees of light and knowledg yet we must come up to an uniformity of practise as if there were no variety of degrees which makes a man a certain creature about six pence better than a horse though some think upon that principle he 's a shilling worse But these Doctrines of the Doctors are collected and raised from the Text just as our Collectors raise a Tax upon indigent non-solvent people who come armed with a Law and a Constable to distrain for that which is not to be had rather than the King should lose his Right and certainly never was Text so strained and distrained to pay what it never owed never man so Rack't to confess what he never thought never was a Pumice-stone so squeez'd for water which it never held nor ever a good Cause so miserably put to its shifts as to press those innocent Texts against their wills which refuse to come in as Volunteers to the service Notwithstanding what has been said it shall stand for not-spoken if the Doctor can prove his assertion That the present Separation is carried on by such principles as will overthrow any Church whatever Thus then he proceeds If it be lawful to separate upon pretence of greater purity where there is an agreement in Doctrine and the substantial parts of worship then a bare difference in opinion as to some circumstantials in worship and the best constitution of Churches will be a sufficient ground to break Communion and set up new Churches Now because this dead weight always hangs lugging on one side give me leave to put a Counterpoise on the other side to make it hang more even If it be lawful to impose the Ceremonies upon pretence of decency and order and to exact submission to them upon pretence of Peace and Vnion then may bare will and pleasure be a sufficient reason to raise the severest persecution to force Communion against conscience or to destroy all the Churches of Christ on earth for a bare difference in opinion as to some circumstances Let us however with all tenderness examine this way of Reasoning always protesting 1. That we will not be cheated with that expression of pretence of greater Purity for we do not allow hypocrisie to be a sufficient ground of Separation 2. Nor with that other expression a bare difference in opinion which we would explain both here and hereafter if we understood the meaning of it These things premised I observe in his Argument some things prudently supposed and those supposals as wisely improved First then here are some things very prudently supposed As 1. that there is a confessed agreement between the differing parties in Doctrine But where shall we find that system of Doctrine in which the Agreement is supposed to lye shall we seek it in the Holy Scriptures In vain one party can find a Church-power there to make Canons in which the other party shall be bound to acquiesce upon pain and peril of the guilt of Schism but the Dissenting-party can see no such matter Those again have found a Doctrine there that the Addition of any thing in specie to Gods word or worship which he has not commanded in genere is culpable but the other party wonder where they pickt up this ungrateful Doctrine shall we then go search for this supposed or confessed agreement in the 39 Articles there or no where we may expect to meet with it but here also are we miserably disappointed for the Doctor himself has satisfied us in his Rational Account p. 54 55. That the learned Primate of Ireland understand not B. Vsher but Bramhall tells us the sense of the 39 Articles of this Church Neither doth the Church of England define any of these Questions necessarily to be believed either necessitate praecepti or Medii but only bindeth her sons for peace-sake not to oppose them And more fully in another place We do not suffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of England at his pleasure yet neither do we look upon them as essentials of saving faith or legacies of Christ and his Apostles but in a mean as pious opinions fitted for the preservation of Vnity neither do we oblige any man to believe them but not to contradict them Now if this be true I would fain learn how the Doctor can be so confident that we are agreed in Doctrine when we are at a loss and wholly to seek in what Doctrine to agree You are surprized Sir I doubt not at this discovery Has not the Church of England defined in her 39 Articles any thing necessarily to be believed then it seems the essence and existence of a God is not defined to be necessary Are these Articles no essentials of saving faith then it 's no essential point of faith to believe that Christ is the eternal Son of God Are these but pious Opinions then it 's a pious Opinion that we are justified by faith without our own merits
common enemies nor make it indifferent to dissenters whether they be smothered in the house or forced to venture their necks by leaping out at the windows for so have the miserable Hungarians been tempted to think it better to live nay to dye once under the Ottoman sword than to be always dying under the Austrian tyranny I shall then begin to believe that man is afraid of a Paroxysme of the Gout who will retrench his intemperance to prevent it and will then suppose them real and sincere in complaining of what they feel or fear when they will forbear or do at least some very little thing to remove the one and obviate the other But Dominion even in a Dungeon is too sweet a morsel to be spit up again unless God gives a strong vomit A prelatical spirit will be persecuting when in exile at Frankfurt and the Jesuites thought it worthy their ambition to vex the Seculars even in Wisbich Castle Let then the Dr. conclude with that grave sentence All parties pretend a Zeal for Peace so they may have it in their own way by which it appears that it 's not peace they aim at but victory nor unity so much as having their own wills I will therefore compound with him at ten shillings per pound that is let him take one half of this for truth and resign â—â—e the other That one partie has a Zeal for Peace so they may have it in their own way and then I shall gain this by the bargain That it's â—ot Peace they seek but Victory nor Unity so much as having their own wills Peace then without bringing in St. Austin for a voucher is a good thing yes a very good thing it is if we could catch it but thus have I seen one sport with his Dog shewing him a crust which when the poor Cur has zealously jumpt to reach he holds it up higher and never intends him one snap of it Our Romish adversaries it seems do continually upbraid us with our Schisms and Separations Let 'em look at home To take off which reproach the Dr. thinks it would be happy if all those who agree in renouncing the errors and corruptions of the Roman Church could as easily join together in the great duties of our common Religion that is in our prayers and praises and Sacraments and all solemn acts of divine worship And will this make us all happy Then I proclaim to all Protestants from this day forward solid happiness for we all join together in the great duties of our common Religion for though we join not in the private fancies niceties and opinions of some one partie in the great duties common to all Protestants we are fully agreed Agreed in the matter of our prayers if not in the form in the matter of our praises though not in the mode in Sacraments though perhaps not in superstitions annexed to them in the Acts of Divine Worship though not in the parts of humane worship in the substance not in Ceremonie and in one God one Christ though not in one Place which probably we never shall till St. Pauls be built and probably not then neither but must adjourn our local meeting to the day of the General Assembly Thus are we all agreed who are agreed and so far as we are agreed in renouncing the errors and corruptions of Rome but if it shall appear that we are not agreed in this in vain do we expect agreement in other things There are two things at which the Church might possibly aim whenever merciful providence should recover it out of the gloomy shades of persecution the one Purity the other external Splendor and Glory But it 's sadly observable that Church-men who always engross to themselves the conduct and management of affairs commonly begin at the wrong end of their work Securing in the first place their own Grandeur and Dignity and leaving the Reforming the Abuses which had silently crept in as a matter of less concernment to their better leisure So was it in the days of Constantine Queen Elizabeth so was it in our own when the Clergy fell a scrambling for preferments as boys for a largess of nuts and apples whilst Reformation lay a bleeding a gasping a dying for they had other Irons in the Fire which must not cool so the Sorbonist in his Philosophia Vulgaris refutata informs us Jam postquam horrendae tyraâ—norum Carnificinae desierunt pax omnimoda parta est c. That is When once the bloody shambles of Tyrants by God's Providence were shut up and welcome Peace began to shine upon the late clouded Churches they wisely fell to work with exterior things and busied themselves about Religious Rites Ceremonies Ornaments about matters of Order and Subordination about the Degrees of Ministers their outward Splendor the power and efficacy of Church-Discipline about Laws Canons and Ecclesiastical Government about the Union and Combination of Churches about the exalting some in preeminence above others and subjection of the poorer to the greater and richer about maintaining Uniformity and preventing Schisms And this part indeed the Church happily effected and when they should have proceeded to the other of Reformation a dismal hurricane by the irruption of the Northern and barbarous Nations overspread the face of the Church with Egyptian darkness that it was some Ages before she could recover her former brightness This is the sad Fate that commonly attends great and general Deliverances Churchmen are cumber'd with many things and neglect the one thing necessary and instead of reducing Doctrine Worship and Discipline to their Original Integrity to what they were in the beginning are otherwise employ'd about setling Liturgies re-inforcing Ceremonies exacting Uniformity advancing their own Dignity till God in righteous judgment removes from them the opportunities of acting for themselves who slighted those inviting junctures wherein they might have served their God And most men have noted that within these twenty years Providence offer'd them three seasons wherein with great ease they might have healed our Breaches the first after His Majesties happy Restauration the second after the Plague Fire and War the third after the Discovery of the late Horrid and Popish Plot but yet it pleased not God to give them with the opportunities to see the things that belong'd to our Peace We see then Peace is a Commodity everywhere exposed to view They complain that we cheapen it but will not buy And indeed we would not out-bid our Purses nor buy Gold too dear We complain that they offer it but at such unreasonable Rates that we cannot reach it but so have many done that have got rich Goods in their hands set 'em too high outstand a good Market and at last perhaps may be glad to put 'em off for an old Song But it 's time to come to my self and attend the Doctor who after an eloquent Preamble in commendation of Peace which all men grant and of the danger of Divisions
a little disguis'd the matter in his Discourse to make it smile upon his pretensions I will give the Reader the naked truth of the whole business There were in the Apostles days some Judaizing Christians who being not well weaned from the Mosaic Ceremonies would needs compel the Gentile Converts to their old observances for which they plausibly pretened that those Rites having been once confessedly establish'd by Divine Authority and not yet explicitely repealed by any Countermand of Christ equal to that whereby they had been enjoined were still in full force power strength and virtue and did oblige the gentil world to give their assent and consent to them and in pursuance of this imposing humor they would have obtruded upon them a Canon Acts 15.5 That except they were circumcised and observ'd the law of Moses they could not be saved To this Usurpation the Apostles oppose their authority and taking the Gentile Christians into their protection vindicate their Liberty and command them to stand fast in it and not tamely surrender themselves to the will and pleasures of these imperious Masters And because St. Peter by his compliance had hardened these Judaizers in their Superstitions St. Paul takes him up roundly reproves him to his face and strenuously asserts their Gospel Liberty which had he not done the Doctor thinks all the Gentile Christians had been forced either to a compliance with the Jews or to a perpetual Schism But herein I must beg his pardon for though they had been forced to a Separation it had been no Schism which visibly had lain on the other side for Paul in his admonition to the Church at Rome lays all the blame of the Separation not upon them that separate but on those that gave cause to the Separation Rom. 16.17 I beseech you Brethren mark them which cause divisions and offences among you and avoid them Where he points to us these three things 1. That they who cause divisions are the culpable dividers the Imposers must be responsible for the evil consequences of their Impositions 2. That it 's lawful nay a duty to divide from those that unwarrantably give such cause of division 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decline or depart from them 3. That any Condition of Communion imposed besides as well as against the Doctrine received from the Apostles is a sufficient ground to condemn the Imposers to justifie those that reject such conditions for so we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so we find it rendered Gal. 1.8 Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you then that we have preach'd unto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be accursed Hitherto matters do not work to the Doctor 's mind he does movere but nihil promovere the step he has taken has set his cause a step backward 2 And therefore he will try another Experiment whether the Epistle with the Context may not invite or draw the Text to his Interest 1 His first approach he makes thus The Apostle exhorts the Philippians to an unanimous and constant resolution in holding fast to the faith of the Gospel in spight of all the malice and threats of their enemies Phil. 1.27 28. And most wholsom counsel it is God give all Dissenters grace to take it for if once the fears of Troubles and Persecutions make men afraid to own and maintain their Religion it will be an easie matter for their enemies first to divide and then to subdue them This will not yet do the Doctor 's work nor undo the Dissenters 2 He makes a nearer approach thus The Apostle beseeches them in the most vehement and affectionate manner not to give way to any differences or divisions among them Very good As much then as in us lies we will live peaceably with all men But what security shall we have that they will do so with us We will labor that there be no differences in judgment which yet in our imperfect state is not to be expected but if there be differences we will take care there be no divisions for we are taught to maintain Christian affections towards those that are of different apprehensions from our selves and different practices too proportionable to those different sentiments for so the Apostle adjures the Church Phil. 2.1 2. To be like minded having the same love being of one accord and of one mind Upon which words the Doctor gives us this Paraphrase q. d. I have seen the miserable effects of Divisions in other Churches indeed Divisions that are caused by or issue out in hatred malice envy persecution have effects as miserable as themselves but what miserable effects did he or we ever see that all mens faces were not of one complexion Let me therefore entreat you to avoid the first tendencies to any breaches among you and unnecessary Impositions lay the first foundations to these Mischiefs entertain no jealousies no unjust suspicions of each other as that the most godly among those that differ from you in lesser matters can least endure to be told of their faults or that the tenderness of their minds out of meer shame-facedness keeps them from declaring truth but shew all the kindness you are able to your fellow members and surely you are able to wave these Bones of Contention these make-bate Ceremonies you are able to forbear railing persecuting are you not I confess Pride is an impotency of mind and Passion a great weakness of soul the strongest wills have commonly the weakest reason to govern them and the ambition of glorying in the flesh of those whom they can make to truckle to their Humors and Crotchets is a pretty flesh-pleasing vanity which I hope in time you will overcome so that hitherto we can smell no Plot the Doctor has upon us no scent of Match or Powder or how by these Ambages and remote Fetches he intends to attack us we discern not 3 In the next place therefore he tells us the Apostle gives Cautions against some persons from whom their greatest danger was viz. such as pretended a mighty zeal for the Law Nay I always suspected our danger would come from that Quarter but am glad we know our enemies and do promise him we 'll keep a special eye upon them in all their motions Some such there are in the world who are exceeding zealous for Ceremonies and Traditions and would triumph if they could carry it for Bel and the Dragon such as would knead the world into its old mass and lump rather than want of their wills and as the Judaizers would renounce Christianity and return to Moses except the Gentiles would conform to their legal observances so have we some such who will revolt to Rome unless they may not retain for who hinders them but impose their own admired knick-knacks upon others Now such as these the Apostle deals smartly with he calls them Dogs Evil Workers the Concision because they tore in pieces the seamless Coat of Christ into shreds
and tatters confounding the minds of peaceable Christians who would willingly have united upon those plain easie reasonable terms upon which they had already received and professed Christianity only these peevish trouble-houses would not let them And this is remarkable that the Apostle never gave one hard word to the Conscientious Dissenter nor one good word to the Judaizing Imposer in all his Epistles To what end now is all this pompous ceremonious train of words to what end are these Positions Suppositions and Preliminaries why so many Lines Entrenchments Galleries why these tedious Approaches why all this Spanish Gravity why does he not fall aboard with his Text and storm it Alas Things are not yet ripe and ready for such hot service and therefore 4 The Apostle having done this he persuades all good Christians to do as he did ver 15. Let us therefore as many as be perfect be thus minded What was that to assert his liberty he did so and would not be brought under the power even of lawful things 1 Cor. 6.12 Was it not to put his neck under the old yoke of bondage he did so or did he scorn to build up what he had once pluckt down he did so and would he have us do as be did Content Shall we stand fast in our liberty as he in his Content Must we not build up whatever of humane inventions we have pluckt down Content Would he have us as many as be perfect be thus minded Content Let as many as are as he was do as he did They that are honour'd with his Attainments let them come up to his Evangelical Practice when we were children we thought spake acted as children Are we grown up to Manhood let 's put away childish things It is a shame not to outgrow our Trinckets our Rattles our Hobby-horses when we have outgrown the Rickets Shall it be said of Christians as of the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Greeks are always children But such were the Judaizers always learning never coming to the knowledge of the truth And you may as soon whip these huge great Boys out of all Religion as out of one Ceremony so fond so doating so peevish froward awkward such a whimpering such a whining such puleing and powting for Ceremonies as if they had lost that famous Engine of the Nutcrack or had been plundered of a pin-box I have read of a learned man in this nation who tells us he had quite other sentiments of and apprehensions about death than most men others were afraid to die but he was ashamed to die Really many are afraid of the Ceremonies as sinful and I am not without those fears too but methinks I am greatly ashamed of 'em as I should that any should spie me riding upon a penny Colt or a Gelding No St. Paul would have them that are thus perfect grow up into a more manly and generous way of serving and worshipping God Though the famous Alcibiades did once to please a child condescend Ludere par impar equitare in Arundine longâ To play the fool at even-or-odd And for a hobby-horse ride a rod. 5. Hitherto we have felt no wound but like the bird in the tree looking at the gunner wonders what he 's fidling about till of a sudden she 's past feeling At last the Author comes nearer Because says he many disputes and differences as to opinion and practice might happen among them he therefore lays down two Rules to govern themselves by Here now the Dr. beats up and gets within our Quarters and very subtilly would insinuate to the unwary Reader that the Apostle gave two Rules about one and the same thing whenas 't is evident he gave but one nor was it possible he should give more in that case The case which the Dr. supposes is that there were differences of opinion and practice among the Philippians Let it be supposed Does the Apostle give two Rules in that case No! but one single Rule which was the Rule of mutual forbearance and leaving one another to Gods Instructions but in Another Case where Christians had attained to be of the like mind there the Rule was that they should walk up and according to what they had attained But we must go through now we are in and therefore let us hear what these two Rules are and what use he will make of them 1. Rule If any happen'd to differ from the body of Christians they lived with they should do it with modesty and humility not breaking out into factions and Divisions but waiting for further information Now here we want that Accuracy that might have been expected from a person of his Abilities For 1. He puts it as a rare and extraordinary Case If any happen such a one as might fall out in an Age or so whereas this was a most familiar Case and that which the Apostle met with everywhere that there was a difference of apprehensions about the lesser things at least of Religion nor was he to seek what direction to give in the case but uniformly determines that they should not judge nor despise each other upon these accounts nor was there ever any Church at any time wherein these differences did not happen 2. He lays the stress of the duty upon those that differ from the Body of the Christians they live with It is very true the Church or Body of Christians at Philippi at that time was sound in the Doctrine of the Gospel evangelical in their worship and regular in government and Discipline and therefore it was the duty of those that differed from that body not to separate from it but suppose any happened to differ from the body of Christians they lived with which were not so must the Rule hold equally is there the same obligation in the case also what if a Christian should happen to live at Rome what if it should be the Drs. lot to live there must he be under the same obligation not to divide from the body 3. He supposes the Rule only to be given to the person that happens to differ from the body of the Church whereas the Rule is mainly given to the Church how they are to demean themselves toward a dissenting brother viz. to wait till God shall reveal his mind to the person otherwise minded Neither is he to act nor the Church to compel till God clear it up to his Conscience that he may act like a Saint or since Saints is a term of reproach at least like a Man and not a Beast 4. He disguises his rule by those Terms of Art faction separation c whereas faction and separation are two things the one always sinful the other many times a duty 2. Rule For those that are come to a firmness and settlement upon the Christian Principles he charges them by all means to preserve Unity and Peace among themselves Now these things also are laid down with as much obscurity as one could wish For 1.
it to be the Dissenters duty to widen their Communion to that Latitude It 's sufficient if they that hold this Principle can justifie it without confuting other mens Notions and they Judge their own Principle and Practice sufficiently authorised from this one thing Their Doctrine Communion and Ordinances have the same extent with those of the first Christians Acts 2.42 Who continued in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship breaking Bread and Prayer And let the opposers prove that any larger extent of Churches than what answers these ends is necessary and they are ready to Conform themselves to it What the Doctor hath to say or however what he hath said will fall under these heads 1. I have never seen any tolerable Proof that the Churches Planted by the Apostles were limited to Congregations To which more needs not be said than that 1. If the Churches planted by the Apostles were in such Congregations it 's no matter to us whether they were limited to such Congregations or no If Congregational bounds be allowed let other and larger bounds be proved by them that are concern'd to justifie them 2. If such particular Churches were not of Christs institution then it would be no Schism to separate from them I say no Schism of Christ's condemning and if others will make other Notions of Schism which Christ and his Apostles never knew and so multiply sin without cause let them contrive a hell too wherein those sins and schisms shall be punished 2 The Doctor proceeds It 's possible at first there might be no more Christians in one City than could meet in one assembly for worship but where doth it appear that when they multiplied into more Congregations they did make new and distinct officers with a separate power of government I confess I know not where any such thing appears that they made new and distinct Churches that is specifically new of another kind sort or species but that they did make other Churches and other Officers that is more Churches and more Officers is made appear thus that if they had not such Officers their assemblies had not answered their ends and if they had not the same power of Government that the other Churches had they had not been of the same kind but quite another thing but what it does not appear the Apostles did it appears abundantly the succeeding corrupter times have done even to form new Churches new Officers wholly distinct from those instituted by Christ and his Apostles and hence it was that to keep Peace as is pretended amongst the Pastors of particular Churches they found out a Bishop and to keep the Bishops from falling together by the ears they invented an Archbishop and because the Metropolitans might possibly quarrel they instituted a Patriarch and because the Patriarchs were subject to the same passions with other men prudence contrived a Pope and clapt him upon them all to keep them in Decorum 3 The Doctor thinks it will not appear credible to any considerate man that the 5000 in the Church of Jerusalem made one stated and fixed Congregation for divine worship Things are credible or incredible as some mens interests and occasions will have them or else it were no such hard matter to make it credible to the Doctor that 5000 10000 20000 might make one stated and fixt Congregation for worship he has an instance of it in St. Andrews Holborn a place which he has cause to know contains more than 5000 and yet they have but one stated fixed Congregation for divine worship 4 The Doctor thinks that much more may be said for lim ting Churches to private families than to particular Congregations Let us hear it then Do we not read of the Church in the house of Priscilla and Aquila Rom. 16.3 5. and of the Church that was in the house of Nymphas at Coloss Col. 4.15 and in the house of Philemon in Laodicea Philem. 2 3. yes we do so and yet hear nothing to the purpose for a Church may be in a house and yet not composed of that house A Church may meet in a family when it consists of more than the family A Church of Dissenters may possibly meet in a house and yet if one of the ecclesiastick Setters should get them in the wind and inform against them that they were there assembled for the worship of God with above the number of four besides the family I fear A Plea that they that meet in a family are of the family would hardly prevent a Conviction 5 Again the Doctor argues thus If notwithstanding such plain examples men will extend Churches to Congregations of many families why may not others extend them to those societies which consist of many Congregations I will tell him why 1. Because his plain examples are plain mistakes nor can he give one instance of a Church that consisted of a family because it was a family 2. We read of Churches of many families but of none composed of many particular Churches Many families have warrant to unite into a Church not as families but as the individuals are duly qualified in order to the great ends of worship edification c. But many Churches have no such warrant to unite for the destruction of those ends or any one of them And it is the end and the usefulness of unity for that end which must regulate and determine the Union It is very lawful to build a Ship or Man of war as big as two or three Yachts which may do better service but it 's folly to make one that would reach from Calice to Dover which must lie like an useless Log unmeet for sailing and the ends for which all Ships are built but let the Doctor extend the name of Church as far as he pleases to the worlds end or as far as the Rules of the Kings bench have been extended we are unconcern'd so long as this is clear that how far soever men may extend Churches name or thing in Compliance with the extent of the civil government yet the extent of our actual communion in worship is no other than that of the Church of which we are by our own choice members 6 He goes on Although when the Churches increased the occasional meetings were frequent in several places yet still there was but one Church one Altar one Baptistry one Bishop which will utterly destroy either parochial or Diocesan Churches For if one Baptistry and one Church be of the same extent what will become of the Diocesan Church in which there are hundred of those Baptistries and but one Bishop and if one Bishop and one Church be of the same extent what will become of the Parochials where there is one Baptistry indeed but not one Bishop And it seems very evident that in the beginning of Christianity a Church was no larger a Body than could assemble in one place for all the ends of a Christian Society so the Apostle supposes 1 Cor. 11.18 when ye come
together in the Church compar'd with ver 20. when ye come together into one place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where to meet in the Church and to meet in one place are phrases of equal Latitude and so Ignatius in his Epistle to the Ephesians Edit Voss p. 20 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. If the Prayer of one or two Christians hath such power how much greater efficacy hath that of the Bishop and the whole Church he therefore that cometh not to that place or that Congregation is already proud and hath condemned himself Hitherto the Doctor has endeavor'd to overthrow the Principle which seeing he cannot do he comes to suppose or grant it yet withal denying that from thence any thing can be drawn that will justifie Separation § 1. Suppose says he that the first Churches by reason of the small numbers of Believers at that time were Congregational yet what obligation lies upon us to disturb the Peace of the Church we live in to reduce Churches to their infant state To which I answer none at all we know no such obligation lies upon us and do wish that they supposing the Church to be Metropolitical or National did see no more obligation lying upon them to disturb the Peace of the Churches that we live in to reduce all to their overgrown state we are for our own liberty without infringing theirs but it 's common to complain of other mens unpeaceableness who will have peace with none but themselves § 2. They do not think it necessary says he to introduce the first community of goods which was far more certainly practised than Congregational Churches nor to wash one anothers feet though Christ did it and bad his Disciples do as he did I answer 1. For Community of Goods I dare say I shall convince the Doctor it was no obliging example for he has no temptation to become a Leveller and would lose more than he could hope to gain by putting all the Benefices of the Land into Hotchpot For there was never any such command or practice for the promiscuous use of all outward things without the free consent of individual Christians Propriety was not then destroyed but each Christian was the Proprietor of his Estate the great exigency of the Church did invite to a very liberal and extraordinary measure of charitable contribution to the necessity of the Saints but still it was voluntary and no otherwise forced than by Arguments Acts 5.4 While it remained was it not thy own and after it was sold was it not in thy power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Their Charity did not destroy Propriety And if the same distress should again overtake any particular Church as that was it would be as much the duty of the Rich to extend their Benevolence to the necessity of their poor Brethren as then it was or could be 2. For his instance of Christ's washing his Disciples Feet and commanding them to do as he did What person that reads the Scripture does not observe that it was not the washing the Feet that was commanded but that mutual deference reciprocal serving of each other avoiding of ambitious encroaching of one over another when Christ had made them Equals this was the great Point Christ would instruct them in by that temporary Ceremony For so it is commanded that we lift up pure hands without wrath and doubting 1 Tim. 2.8 when yet none ever stood so superstitiously upon 't that every man is bound to lift up his hands in Prayer but the Duty was purity of the whole man Two things therefore there are in this reasoning which would be better cleared 1. That there is no more necessity for the worship of God in particular Assemblies at all times under all conditions of the Church than there was for the Community of Goods in that extraordinary exigence of the Church at that time 2. That Propriety of our Estates and the right of our particular Churches to worship God must give way to National Church Frames in both which we have some cause to be tender and not to part with them till we receive better Arguments § 3. The Doctor reasons thus with us They believe that the first Civil Government was appointed by God himself over all Families do they therefore think themselves bound to overthrow Kingdoms to bring things back to their first institution if not why shall the Peace of the Church be in so much worse a condition than that of the Civil State To which the Answer is very plain 1. We look upon our selves under no obligation to disturb much less to destroy Kingdoms or any kind of Government whatever to reduce things to their first institution nor is there any need of it to destroy the Civil Government by reducing the Church to such a posture as will answer the great designs of Religion 2. The same Divine Authority that instituted Civil Government in Families did also institute Government over Families whether Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical and if the Doctor can shew that the same Authority which appointed particular Churches for his own service and glory and the edification of Believers hath also appointed National Churches for the same ends we shall confess that his Instance is parallel his Argument from thence cogent and such as will cut asunder the Nerves of our Answer when the wise God did institute National Civil Government yet be reserved entire to the Masters of Families their authority over Servants and Children and the propriety in their Estates but how will this justifie such a National Church-Government as destroys the inherent power of the Pastors of particular Churches making them only shadows of the primitive Pastoral Authority if shadows and leaving them onely the bare Name if the Name of Pastors without any power inherent in them to govern the Churches over which the Holy Ghost hath made them Overseers § 4. He reasons thus It 's very uncertain whether the Primitive Form were such as they fancy If so then 1. It is as uncertain whether the Primitive Form were such as he Fancies If it were uncertain whether God would be Worship't in particular Congregations that had a power to Govern and Reform themselves then it must be as uncertain nay more uncertain whether God would have a Frame Erected of such Churches where God could not be Worship't 2. And if it be uncertain what the primitive Form was then it 's very crâ—â—â— to plague and torment men as Schismaticks that are quiet and peaceable 〈◊〉 design nothing but the serving their God and saving their Souls for not complying with such a Form or Frame which it is uncertain whether it were the Primitive one or no. 3. And then it will be very certain that there can be no Obligation upon us to hold Communion with the Parochial Church by Divine right since it 's uncertain whether God ever intended such assemblies of Christians or no. 4. And then it will be uncertain also whether the Parochial
particular insinuations which are so subtilly laid that they do the mischief and instil all the poyson of a false accusation but yet escape before men the charge of it only I take notice of one thing Is it not saies he as plainly written by St. Paul If I yet please Men I should not be the Servant of Christ as Woe be unto me if I preach not the Gospel It is so with equal plainness by the Apostle and with equal impertinency by the Doctor and with equal justification of the Nonconformists for they dare not please men to the displeasing of Christ both which they would do by sacrilegious Desertion of their Ministry but Christs displeasure is not to be compensated by mens good will nor his love to be forfeited for fear of incurring their ill will And on whose side the temptation to men pleasing most lies the impartial world will judge though we be silent § 2. His second particular is this If the bare dissatisfaction of mens consciences do justifie the lawfulness of separation and breaking an establisht Rule it were to little purpose to make any Rule at all And to speak my mind freely unless the Rules that have been made in some Countries were to better purposes I know not to what purpose they were made at all these Rules have made the world so irregular and unruly What their purposes were that made the Rules I shall not enquire but what we see or may say the event of them for many Centuries has been nothing but either blind obedience in the most or necessary separation in the rest And much better that all these Humane ecclesiastick rules had never been made than to be made of such sinful materials as must divide us such dubious things as will perplex us or by such persons whom God has not authorized to Command us But his proposition I must except against upon these following grounds 1 I shall not say It is no distinct proposition from the former being only a Reason of it nor that he might have found in his own discourse twenty more propositions if this may stand for one but onely make my exceptions 1. This proposition like most of the rest is of an uncertain sound First we know not what mystery there lies in or may lurk under that Term Bare dissatisfaction For this word has haunted us all along through the discourse Barely Congregational p. 30. Bare suspending Communion p. 20. Barely relating to acts of worship p. 17. And now at last Bare dissatisfaction If he means no more than such dissatisfaction as has no fair reason for it that perhaps will not justify any man in any thing he does or does not but there is a dissatisfaction well cloath'd with decent and Comely presumptions that the thing it 's dissatisfied about is unlawful and it may be with probable arguments too though it wants such demonstration cui non potest subesse falsum And this will justifie if not positive separation yet suspension of a mans action in positive Communion 2. If bare dissatisfaction will justifie our not acting which is all we plead bare dissatisfaction for there is another thing that justifies our Communion with other Churches where we may enjoy the Ordinances of Christ without such dissatisfaction and that is the Command of God which has made it our express duty to walk in the ways of Gods appointment So that if dissatisfaction tye us up from joyning in one place peremptory Command will enjoyn us to joyn in some other 3. This establisht Rule that fills up both pages of his Sermon is an equivocal term for such a Rule may be lawful or unlawful according to the matter of it If the matter of it be things unlawful there needs no dissatisfaction of conscience to justifie separation from it or the violation of it the will of God has already determined that point If it be lawful and conscience be dissatisfied about it conscience will tie up from acting according to it though not oblige to act against it 2 His Proposition is tardy too in respect of the Reason he gives to back it Because says he it is impossible to make any Rule which ignorant and injudicious men shall not apprehend to be in something or other against the Dictates of their Consciences But let knowing and judicious men make the Rules and there will be less cause for ignorant and injudicious men to break 'em They that will make Rules about indifferent things had need have more than an indifferent Judgment more than an ordinary Wisdom to accommodate them to the measure of Knowledge of those for whom they are made And in this case Rules should should not be made as men make Tobacco-Pipes and Glasses on purpose to be broken Tradesmen indeed cannot live if their Wares were Immortal but are Church-men more afraid their Tickney-Rules and China-Canons should be preserved than broken It were better the whole Fry of Apparitors Summoners should starve than live upon the new-made Sins of the people But ignorant men will apprehend these Rules against their Consciences Let then Rules be made for the knowing and wise and leave the poor ignorants to live and grow wiser rather than knock 'em o' th' head because they want Brains But thus it was thus it ever will be whilest men will be establishing their own Rules of Severity and neglect the Rule of Charity given them by the Spirit Rom. 14.3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not nor him that eateth not judge him that eateth which was a Rule made upon as good Advice as any of those made by any Church at any time since Let then the Doctor please himself with his seeming Advantages from the Papers of accommodation we need say no more than 1. That the Case is hugely wide between what the Committee or Sub-Committee there required of their Dissenting Brethren and what the Bishops now require of the people in order to an Union 2. That his Inferences are not fairly drawn from their Expressions 3. The Assembly and their Committees were but men subject to the like Passions with their Brethren and therefore 4. That we are not obliged to vindicate every expression which in heat or haste dropt from their Pens nor to be concluded by their Determinations which with what has been before observed upon this subject is enough to blunt the edge and break the back of the Doctor 's Arguments drawn from their Concessions And yet I cannot forbear a particular examination of some of them for a taste of the rest 1 Though Tenderness of Conscience may justifie Non-Communion in the thing scrupled yet it can never justifie Separation That is he that has the Church-dores lockt upon him must stand there cooling his Toes and never address himself to others that are open for fear of Mr. Hales his Scare-Crow Separation But for Answer 1. We produce Tenderness of Conscience for no other use than to justifie Non-Communion in the things that are
too bad to redeem and whil'st there are such the Church unless She will be a Shrew or a Stepmother must take a tender care of them But if it be so endless to satisfie these erring Consciences leave 'em to God he can do it and he will either forbear them in their ignorance or give them knowledge whom it might become those men a little to imitate who call themselves his servants 3. That Scruple of Conscience is no protection against Schism Who says it is It 's only a Prohibition to afford Communion in what we scruple Except when the things scrupled and not scrupled are so blended together that we cannot swallow what appears lawful but we must gorge that with it which appears otherwise which has been the policy of some modern Imposers so artificially to mix the certain and the uncertain the questionable with the unquestionable that these scrupulous Consciences cannot enjoy that wherein they are satisfied except they will venture at that about which they are not so so are Private Bills stitch'd with the Publick ones that the more useful may sell the other which few else would regard So have I seen idle Masters delight themselves to see their Children play at Bob-apple where the poor young Rascals would have been glad of a Bit but were always prevented by the Candle 4 That the Apostles notwithstanding the difference of mens judgments did prescribe Rules of Uniformity Well but mark their proof Did not the Apostles bind the burden of some necessary things on the Churches albeit there were in those Churches gradual differences of light And will the Doctor infer hence a power to bind unnecessary burdens upon the necks of Disciples because the Apostles imposed such as were necessary The Argument then concludes If the Apostles who were infallible had power to impose Necessaries much more may the Prelates impose Unnecessaries though they be fallible But of these things thus much § 3. Come we now to his third and last Proposition A wilful Error or mistake of Conscience doth by no means excuse from sin These things surely are oddly joined together that a wilful Error and a mistake of Conscience should be made the subject of one Proposition There may be a mistake of Conscience where there 's no wilful Error wilfulness makes every Error double obstinacy being added to it but a mistake of simple ignorance makes it not half so great though it makes it not to become nothing it may excuse à tanto though not à toto and mollifie it a little though not justifie it nor nullifie it It will not excuse from sin And yet p. 44. he moves this Question What Error of Conscience doth excuse a man from sin in following the dictates of it If no Error will excuse why is the Question put What Error will excuse And if some Error will excuse why is the Proposition laid down so loosely and uncertainly A wilful Error or Mistake will not excuse from sin And upon this proposition he makes a case If a man think himself bound to divide the Church by sinful separation that separation is nevertheless a sin for his thinking himself bound to do it which is one of the wildest cases that ever was put For 1. It may be justly questioned whether it be possible for a Man in his wits to think himself bound to divide the Church by sinful separation A man may think himself bound to separate and that separation may possibly be sinful but he cannot think himself bound to sinful separation He that is bound is under a Law He that thinks himself bound thinks himself under a law but it Implies a broad contradiction for a man to think himself bound to sin because that implies that he thinks himself bound not to be bound or under a law to be under no law A sort of men there are that think it lawful to tell a Lie to avoid a great evil to procure some great good Yet none ever owned this principle that it was lawful to sin to procure the one or avoid the other but they pretend that to tell a Lie in such a case under such circumstances is no sin 2. I very much question whether ever any did think himself bound to divide a Church he may possibly think himself bound to avoid it but how should such a crotchet come in 's head that he was bound to divide it when the Church of England separated from Rome did they think it their duty to make divisions in it 3. The instances that he gives are short or wide of his case by many leagues Paul thought himself bound to do many things against the Name of Jesus He did so but not to do one thing that was sin The Jews thought themselves bound in Conscience to kill the Apostles True but yet they thought not themselves bound to kill them sinfully they wanted not pretences to justifie the cause to the World nor untemper'd mortar to daub over their own Conscience 't was easie to say they were rebels against traitors to the Emperor An easie thing to cry out of heresie and schism and sects every where spoken against nor wanted they a Tertullus who before the Magistrates and Judges could accuse Paul for a pestilent fellow a mover of sedition and a Ring-leader of a sect so that all the world sees and the poor dissenters feel the Truth of what the Dr. says men may do very bad things and yet think themselves bound in conscience to do them 4. It s freely granted by all the world that wilful error that is Interpretively such for no man can formally err wilfully does not excuse from sin that is what God has prohibited no mans errour can make a duty what God has commanded no mans errour can discharge him from obedience to it Nor do we or ever did we make Conscience a stalking horse for these ends And thus we have got through the three famous propositions that should have cleared up the objection and so answered to the second Question but what are we edified by all this discourse or how do we understand either what we or Church governours must do in case we or others cannot come up to the establisht rule men are not justifiable in not doing what they lawfully may do well but if they see not that may be lawfully done which may so must they be left to God or no wilful error and mistake will not excuse from sin be it so still what must be done when men cannot come up to the establisht rule I confess I am just as wise as I was but this is the Genius of the Sermon He propounds an enquiry p. 15. How far the obligation doth extend to comply with an establisht rule He shuts one thing out of the Question then a second thing out of the Question then excludes a third out of the Question and at last shuts the Question out of doors and it goes wandring up and down like a vagabond to this day
and himself Let us take heed we do not give too much occasion to our enemies to think the worse of our Church for our sakes Most excellent counsel it had been had he defined critically what occasion is too much what too little and what just enough to make men think evil of the Church And his old Questioning method might have here been seasonably revived How far we may or may not give occasion to enemies to think worse of the Church but we never expect an Answer of these hot-scalding questions occasion may be given and much occasion but too much occasion must not for too much is too much and therefore whatever that may be take heed of it This advice was first design'd for those that continue in Communion with the Church but by some unhappy accident or other it 's turn'd into a word of reproof nay of reproach to those that are out of it In times of common infection they say all diseases turn to the Plague and in the universal paroxism of railing at Dissenters even Sermons that should be Remedies turn into the disease of railing But what have the Nonconformists to do with the Exhortation given to the Conformists even as much as the Doctor had to do to preach against them at Guild-Hall Chappel But let us hear their crime however They blame says he the Government but if themselves were in place or those they love or esteem then the Government had been a very good thing thus do mens judgments vary as their interests do As if a Weathercock should preach from the top of the Steeple one day What Charter has Christ given the Church to bind men up to more than he has done Iren. Epis p. 8. And the next day should tell us that what is lawful may be made a duty and then I am sure the Church has power to bind us up to more than Christ ever did yet it seems if the Nonconformists might have been all made Bishops they had liked Episcopacy well enough for my own part I like it so well that where there 's one Bishop I wish there were five hundred and yet I have heard of some that might have worn the Miter but that they would not purchase repentance so dear But he goes on We find uniformity and order condemn'd as tyrannical till men come in place themselves and then the same things are very good Where the Doctor found this except in Panciroll de rebus perditis I cannot imagine I never heard Vniformity condemn'd as tyrannical but the rigorous forcing of Christians to an affected uniformity in humane crotchets an uniformity in practise without uniformity in judgment If all mens feet were of the same size I should never complain if their shooes were made of the same Last but to pinch a foot of the slovens twelves into a shooe of the childrens threeâ— is to put conscience into the shoomakers stocks which next to those of Bishop Bonners Colehole are the word one can sit in Nor do we abhor Order but Innovations introduced under that specious title nor did I ever find that the Nonconformists were in the Bishops Thrones though some odd fellows got into their Lands without which perhaps neither one side nor other would be very ambitious of the places Let the Doctor then take an occasion or no occasion little or great to revile us to misrepresent us I am sure his brethren are beholden to us for by our means they have scaped a fine scowring and the edg of that Reproof which seem'd to bear hard upon the Conformists is turn'd directly against us which the Doctor might have forborn for two Reasons the one that there were none out of Communion with the Church to hear his Juniper-Lecture and the other because he promised to read them their lesson by themselves which they now are expecting SECT XII The Doctors Considerations considered HE that had scarce half a word to those in Communion with the Church who were present has for those that are out of the Churches Communion though at the time absent First a Squadron of Considerations and secondly a Pacquet of Advices His Considerations are now to be considered which are precisely four 1. The first thing we are to consider is How many things must be born in the Constitution of a Church A world no doubt in some Constitutions by those that are ambitious of their Communion Now that we may not be in arrere in civility we humbly desire all those whom it may concern to consider 1. What our consideration will signifie unless we had a Commission of Terminer as well as Oyer If we might bear what we could and forbear what we could not it might be worth the while to consider what must be born but if the Imposers will consider what they please to lay on our shoulders and we have no consideration left us but whether we will bow or break under the burden what place for consideration 2. We desire it may be considered also what may be forborn by them as well as born by us and that in order to Peace and Union but it 's plain they are all for our bearing and nothing for their own forbearing which yet had been more proper to his Text had he considered that it is the will of God that they that have not attained to the same strength should not be charged with the same burden 3. It ought to be considered also how many things may not be born as well as how many must for when the Intolerable are removed we shall the better bear the rest but if we must bear either all or none to what purpose is our Consideration 4. We have considered again and again both the tolerabiles intolerabiles Ineptias which I English the tolerable and intolerable unfitnesses and know not how to bear either of them And 5. it 's more our interest to consider how we may get strength to bear the displeasure of the Imposers than the lâ—ad of the Impositions seeing we could easily avoid the one if we could but escape the other 6. We desire it may be considered a little that there are different degrees of strength in Christians all have not the same Bajulatory backs nor the same Herculean shoulders and therefore it might become Church-Governours to sit down and consider whether it be agreeable to the mind of Christ that the weak should bear the Imperious passions of the strong and not the strong bear the infirmities of the weak Rom. 15.1 2. The Doctor would have us consider how impossible it is to give satisfaction to all We have considered that too and hope he will consider whether there may not be found a Medium between giving satisfaction to all and to none Methinks this might satisfie all if they that are so zealous for Ceremonies might have their belly-fulls of 'em and they that are more indifferent for 'em might not have 'em cram'd down their throats He was reputed a wise Countrey-Justice
be too happy beat up the Pulpit-drums to awaken drowsie persecution § 2. He advises us not to be always complaining of our hardships and persecutions That 's I confess somewhat a hard chapter to be always forced and never allow'd to complain Let them either take away the cause of Complaint or our sense of the Cause and we shall either not need the advice or quickly take it To vent inward griefs in outward expressions is some little relief to an oppressed heart that must either breath or break but thus passionate Mothers sometimes whip the child till it cryes and then whip it for crying which a blunt great man once exprest in more slovenly phrase To beat a Dog till he stinks and then beat him for stinking which had never offended the Readers ears if the Doctor comparing the Separators to Dogs p. 7 8. had not warranted the Decency of the expression Nor yet do we always complain of our hardships nor with uncivil reflexions nor at all of our Prince in whom we might be compleatly happy if some Insinuators did not intercept his Royal Propensities to Grace and Mercy How easie is it for them that are at ease to read Lectures of patience to those in misery thus we advise the poor sick patient to patience and gravely reprove his sighs and groanings Omnes Consilium facilè aegrotis damus And thus the keepers of the Inquisition pity their wretched prisoners telling them they do ill to complain of their hard fare since a spare diet is more for the health of them that want air and exercise thus did Julian answer the complaints of the Christians That he had taken away nothing from them but what was a hindrance to their spiritual race and now they might more easily thrust in at the narrow gate when he had stript them of the worlds cumber but to pinch us and then command us not to feel is to chew the bullet that the wound may be more incurable the anguish more intolerable We will not say with Job chap. 16. v. 4. If your soul were in our souls stead we could heap up words against you but this we may that seeing he will neither allow us to lay down our burthens nor complain of them we will allow our selves to complain of our sins and when we are discharg'd of those we shall bear other loads the better § 3. We have this Advice Not to condemn others for what we our selves have practised and think to be lawful 'T is good counsel Nor do we remember that ever we persecuted our brethren for non-compliance with our inventions nor that we know of did we ever silence two thousand Ministers at one clap for scrupling our modes of worship The heats and animosities of Brethren ought to be bewailed not imitated and though they have not silenced each other for trifles yet the wise God to take down their stomacks has chosen they should suffer by others hands and not their own But the Doctor turns his Advice into Accusation and draws up a Charge against the several sorts of Dissenters from their own practices 1 And first he must be supposed to begin with the Presbyterians Who contend even at this day for the obligation of a Covenant which binds men to endeavour after uniformity in Doctrine Discipline and Worship I will add the words following according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches And will they condemn the Doctor for such a Covenant Vniformity they plead for and Vniformity they plead against and yet without any shew of contradiction for it 's another Uniformity they plead for than that they plead against If T. G. had advised the Doctor not to condemn the Papists for what he himself practises not to condemn them for worshipping God when he worships the same God his answer had been ready we worship and you worship the same God but not with the same worship And so from his own answer he might have answer'd himself The great rule we own is this In necessariis unitas in Adiaphoris libertas in utrisque charitas Let unity and if you will Vniformity be kept in necessaries in non-necessaries liberty in both charity 2 The Independents must have a touch too for their severity in New England where as he says They made it no les◠than banishment for the Anabaptists to set up other Churches among them That is they banisht them to their own homes in Old England we desire we may suffer no worse banishment here But yet the news is very bad if it be true but we suspect all stories from thence ever since the great Archdeacon licensed the Legend of one Mr. Baxter baptized in his own blood by the Anabaptists there for which his Doctorship came upon the stool of repentance but supposing the information true he must first weigh all the circumstances of it before he can justly condemn them and then show that we have practised the same thing we condemn in others 3 He has a fling at the Quakers too Who notwithstanding the single independency of every mans light within have found it necessary to make rules and orders among themselves to govern their societies to which they expect an uniform obedience and allow no liberty out of the Power and the Truth And let them expect it so long as they do not exact it I am confident those persons will not condemn the Clergy for their highest expectations if they would forbear their rigid exactions I see then plainly some mens dealings are harder than their arguments Vniformity may be good who imposes it is not much considerable all the controversie lyes what the matter of which it must consist what the rules by which it must be enjoined ought to be § 4. His next advice is Not to inflame the peoples heats by making their differences with the Church of England to appear greater than they are They that complain of other mens heats ought to cool their own but thus the Torrid Zone may send a Pacquet of Advice to the Temperate not to inflame the peoples heats They that make the differences not they that make 'em appear are the dividers nor have we made 'em appear greater than they are though some have made 'em greater than they need be If we preach this Doctrine to the people that the Parish-Churches are true Churches they will never believe us so long as they believe the Doctor That one Church one Altar one Baptistry and one Bishop in his sense were of the same extent and latitude and all the rest but Occasional Meetings pag. 27. and if we should preach to them that if Occasional Communion be lawful constant communion will be a duty they would but laugh at us and perhaps we should smile a little at our selves That the Dissenters have as the Doctor says some little interests of their own is very true little very little interests they are but if he will thence conclude they prefer 'em before